I would like to set me a camera for the following purposes:
-Scenic work Experimental work- Documentary work-
Both the Panasonic HDC-TM900 I find it quite appropriate, as synonymous with the Panasonic Lumix GH2 (14-42mm), where I currently tend to the latter tendency, because of the cinematic look.
Do you have arguments for one or the other or even a different camera? I am glad to hear it.
ps. I originally wanted the TM700, but the costs become so strangely, almost as much as the TM900.
Antwort von marwie:
The advantage in the HDC-TM900 is IMHO that the tonal range is more mature (headphones output, etc.), you have a motorized zoom and 1080 50p.
In GH2, the larger sensor is an advantage and the ability to change the Lens (Lenses are uslassen lot of use by third-party adapter manual) is. The touch of AF GH2 is synonymous quite nice, so you can make eg synonymous focus shifts.
The GH2 is the TM900 and 1080 24p 1080 25p, 25p for PAL countries will manage to keep it simple, keep at it, on which medium you want to play the movies. Bluray is synonymous with PC and 24p, with DVD you would have to stop or otherwise make Pal speedup 3:2 pull-down with NTSC.
In my opinion, it depends on your priorities, and experimental work for the stage would be more likely to offer the GH2 + ev external sound for documentary and more, the HDC-TM900 (but is synonymous as to how you work).
If you opt for GH2, I would rather take the older Panasonic 14-45mm or 14-140mm (the latter is suitable for video s.besten but containing more expensive).